Searcher:
It's easy to repeat the false teaching that Judas never partook of the emblems of the New Covenant - but read Luke's account (22:19-23) for a bit more detail, and you will see the inspired account confirms that he did partake!!
He was not present for Christ's revealing of the Kingdom Covenant, something for which no emblems were used.
What I find curious is how the synoptics and the gospel of John seem ambivalent about the subject:
Matthew 26:20-30 places the discussion about betrayal before the emblem passing. But when Judas left is not precisely stated.
Mark 14:17-26 is very similar to Matthew's account. The precise point at which Judas leaves is not stated. But the discussion of Judas' betraying Jesus is before the discusion of the emblems
Luke 22:19-22 would seem to imply that Judas was there, although, again, the precise point of his leaving is unstated. Yet Luke states early on that he has arranged things "with accuracy" and "in logical order," which may or may not include precise chronological ordering. The Greek terms do not necessarily include that idea. (Luke 1:3,4) I posted some research from a commentary about the subject of chronological ordering in Luke here. (see my post # 492. You have to scroll a ways down.)
John doesn't mention the passing of the emblems at the Last Supper (John 13-17), although he does mention Judas' leaving fairly early in the account. But the precise timing of Judas' leaving is unstated.
John also has the discussion in chapter 6 that would seem to give meaning to the emblems to his readers. And that chapter also mentions Judas as the eventual betrayer of Jesus. But again, no clear distinction is made concerning him and the emblems. (John 6:70-1)
If anything is clear about the combined weight of these accounts, it is that whether Judas partook or not was never an issue. The gospel writers never saw fit to specifically settle that.
Contrast that with the Society's insistance that Judas was not there. That contrast alone tells me that the Society does not correctly (or fully, or both) understand the significance to the Memorial. They see the Memorial as an issue of 'who will rule with Christ.' And since Jesus described those who would 'sit on thrones' with him as those who 'have stuck with him in his trials,' that would preclude Judas. (Luke 22:28-30)
But the gospel writers, knowing what Jesus said about those who would rule with him (Compare also Matt 19:27-29; 20:20-23), left the matter of Judas' partaking open to discussion. They (the gospel writers) obviously saw things differently than the Society does. That contrast in viewpoints clearly marks the WT viewpoint as deficient.
(As an after thought, notice also in Matthew 20:20-23 Jesus saying that particular positioning in the Kingdom was not his to decide. And contrast that with the definitiveness of his command to partake of the emblems ["Take this . . . and eat/drink"]. That contrast is subtle, but is also an indication that the emblems are not about 'who will rule with Christ.')
Take Care
